Zulip Chat Archive

Stream: new members

Topic: algebraic topology


Jonathan (Nov 10 2021 at 19:09):

Hi, I'm new to Lean and I noticed that there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of algebraic topology. I'd like to contribute by adding definitions for homology and homotopy groups and proving some main results. I think it would make sense to start by introducing some basic category-theoretic definitions, such as the category of pointed spaces, the category of pairs, and the category of pointed pairs. Where would be a good place to make these definitions? Maybe in topology.category.Top.basic?

Yaël Dillies (Nov 10 2021 at 19:18):

^ @Shing Tak Lam

Johan Commelin (Nov 10 2021 at 20:18):

@Jonathan Welcome! There's some stuff there, but there's certainly a lot of low-hanging fruit as well. We have simplicial sets, and there's a bunch of abstract homological algebraic. (E.g. computing homology of a chain complex.)
Shing has been adding homotopies, and there's an open PR with the definition of π₁. It would be good to coordinate with him.

Johan Commelin (Nov 10 2021 at 20:19):

Defining those categories that you suggest sounds like a useful thing to do.

Jonathan (Nov 10 2021 at 20:35):

Johan Commelin said:

Jonathan Welcome! There's some stuff there, but there's certainly a lot of low-hanging fruit as well. We have simplicial sets, and there's a bunch of abstract homological algebraic. (E.g. computing homology of a chain complex.)
Shing has been adding homotopies, and there's an open PR with the definition of π₁. It would be good to coordinate with him.

Thanks for the pointers! I'll get in touch with him

Scott Morrison (Nov 10 2021 at 21:14):

We have over categories and arrow categories, and these should probably be used when defining the category of pointed spaces, and possibly when defining the category of pairs.

Jonathan (Nov 10 2021 at 23:12):

Ah yes, seems like under categories are perfect for the category of pointed spaces. Is there a preferred single-point space in existence, or should I define one?

Adam Topaz (Nov 10 2021 at 23:22):

@Jonathan it depends how explicit you want to be. If you're in category theory land, you can use a noncomputable terminal object using docs#category_theory.limits.terminal

Adam Topaz (Nov 10 2021 at 23:23):

(there is a nice notation for this: ⊤_ , see
https://github.com/leanprover-community/mathlib/blob/3c2bc2e797d010b8c0b5ea13fb404b9c4213bf3b/src/category_theory/limits/shapes/terminal.lean#L141

Adam Topaz (Nov 10 2021 at 23:24):

Alternatively, I think docs#punit should have a topology instance, so you could use Top.of punit for the "explicit" single-point space.

Adam Topaz (Nov 10 2021 at 23:26):

docs#punit.topological_space

Scott Morrison (Nov 10 2021 at 23:38):

I would encourage using ⊤_ , and perhaps make the definition of pointed C for any C with a terminal object, not just Top!

Scott Morrison (Nov 10 2021 at 23:41):

https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/pointed+object could keep one busy for a while!

Adam Topaz (Nov 10 2021 at 23:46):

In general it would be nice to build up a theory for concrete categories where the forgetful functor is representable.

Scott Morrison (Nov 10 2021 at 23:54):

The random issue bot just mentioned @Bhavik Mehta's previous effort in this direction #7436. I agree it would be nice to revive / continue this!

Johan Commelin (Nov 11 2021 at 06:29):

@Jonathan :up:


Last updated: Dec 20 2023 at 11:08 UTC